I dont understand why fans of a team want their player to win an individual award. Who gives a ****. I want the Broncos to win a superbowl, not Manning to win a series of awards. I wouldnt be remotely happier if he is the MVP.

That being said, surely some voters will get caught up in the neck surgery/taking a brand new team to the AFC top seed story. Same goes for Peterson, great story to go with the numbers. It will be a close finish between the two IMO.

Because Adrian Peterson is a really good person and I like rooting for him. If I was a Steeler fan and Ben Roethlisberger was in the running I wouldn't give a ****.

Because Adrian Peterson is a really good person and I like rooting for him. If I was a Steeler fan and Ben Roethlisberger was in the running I wouldn't give a ****.

I don't think Ben Roethlisberger has ever been to a Pro Bowl (as pathetic as that sounds). It might have something to do with him banging ***** in restrooms who then cry rape, but there is not a chance in hell he ever wins the MVP award or is in legitimate contention of it. No one likes him. Steelers fans don't even care enough about him to defend him. Until then **** QBs like Vince Young will get in over him. Or Matt Schaub.

The correct answer is Adrian Peterson. JJ Watt would be my second option. But Peterson just had the best season of anyone in the NFL. If he doesn't win it this year, then we might as well not even consider any other offensive position player for this award.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Wright

I honestly believe Reggie Bush has turned into exactly the type of player I envisioned.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PossibleCabbage

I would like it if there were more successful black Quarterbacks in the NFL...

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51

iamcandian lives in a cabin in the Yukon Territory and writes letters to railroad barons about the price of hard tack.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorsBullsFan

I could possibly see Matthew Stafford Dropping out of the 1st round

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoRavens

Tahj Boyd has the best fundamentals of any QB in this class, I think his game translates great to the NFL.

All Day you dummies. Pretty much everyone called him AD not AP when he was at Oklahoma. It's just when he got to the pros, dumb people who don't really follow college football didn't get the nickname so they just assumed it was AP and started calling him that instead.

Week 1 they beat Jacksonville in OT with 84 yards from Peterson in the run game. Average performance.

Week 2 they lose to Indianapolis with 60 rushing yards for Peterson. Very average performance.

Week 3 they beat SF with 86 rushing yards. Nice against a good defense but hardly world beating.

Week 4 they beat Detroit with Peterson breaking 100 for the first time.

Week 5 they beat Tennessee with Peterson back in the 80s yardage wise.

That was 4 wins in the first 5 games with good to average production from Peterson. The Lions finished with 4 wins on the season.

You're my buddy in here and all, and usually I have your back. But you're way off base here. What Peterson accomplished this season is historic. He came back from a terrible knee injury after only nine months and was average for the first 5 games. After that he arguably had the best season ever for a RB. Like someone else pointed out it's not fair to only highlight those five games when he just returned from a ACL and then completely ignore the following 11 games. IMO AD is the clear cut MVP, and if Manning wins it that just goes to show that the ones voting for this all got rusty trombones from Manning.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElectricEye

I'm a whiny little kunt. Feel sorry for me as I go masturbate to a picture of my mom dressed as a teletubby.

You're my buddy in here and all, and usually I have your back. But you're way off base here. What Peterson accomplished this season is historic. He came back from a terrible knee injury after only nine months and was average for the first 5 games. After that he arguably had the best season ever for a RB. Like someone else pointed out it's not fair to only highlight those five games when he just returned from a ACL and then completely ignore the following 11 games. IMO AD is the clear cut MVP, and if Manning wins it that just goes to show that the ones voting for this all got rusty trombones from Manning.

I have no issue with Peterson being MVP now that the Vikes are in the playoffs. My response which you quoted was a direct response to a post saying without Peterson the Vikings would finish below the Lions which I don't believe to be true. I simply highlighted those games because the Vikings won while Peterson was getting back to full steam.

Let me clarify, what Peterson did this year was off the charts ridiculous. He missed out on a long standing record by 8 yards despite not having a terrific start to the year. When Harvin went down it was literally all on Peterson to drag the Vikings to the playoffs. However it doesn't change the fact that the Vikings were winning games before Peterson went on his ridiculous run of ten games.

The Lions won 4 games all year. The Vikings won 4 out of their first 5. That's simply the point I was making. Not detracting from Peterson, just trying to make a case that the Vikings wouldn't be a bottom dwelling team without him as a lot of people are stating they would be

You are so spoiled by how good of a season Adrian Peterson had. 80+ yards in a game is still a very good performance for a running back. Only five other running backs AVERAGED 80+ yards per game. Adrian Peterson averaged 80.5 yards per game in his six WORST games. Yeah, that's right. You could completely ignore Adrian Peterson's TEN BEST games, and he'd still be 6th in yards per game.

It's still a good performance. At that stage of the season he would have ranked approximately 7th or 8th in the league in yards and his yards per carry were 4.38. Once again that's nice production but not exactly elite, and he wasn't the sole reason the Vikings won those games. Any game after about week 6 or 7, yeah Peterson is why they won, but not those first few games and that is the point that so many are bringing up. Scroll through some of the pages in this thread and you will see comments such as the Vikings would rival the Chiefs without AD, Vikings would be one of the worst teams, Adrian Peterson carried the Vikings to all their wins etc etc

I'm not denying how good Peterson was this year and now the Vikings are in the playoffs I'm not stating he shouldn't be MVP, however some of the things being said in this thread are false

It's still a good performance. At that stage of the season he would have ranked approximately 7th or 8th in the league in yards and his yards per carry were 4.38. Once again that's nice production but not exactly elite, and he wasn't the sole reason the Vikings won those games. Any game after about week 6 or 7, yeah Peterson is why they won, but not those first few games and that is the point that so many are bringing up. Scroll through some of the pages in this thread and you will see comments such as the Vikings would rival the Chiefs without AD, Vikings would be one of the worst teams, Adrian Peterson carried the Vikings to all their wins etc etc

Here's the thing you seem to be overlooking here. Let me try and illustrate it in a way you can easily understand.

About those first 5 games for the Vikings, when he wasn't racking up big #s but they still won 4 of them.

Opposing defenses were focused on stopping #28, as they always have been. He wasn't quite the same yet, but he still played. He was a great "decay" as we saw it open things up for Harvin. It worked.

You cannot blame him for such a small % of his record-setting 2,097 yards not coming in weeks 1-5. It was a miracle he was even out there that soon. He should have been on a "pitch count" early. Was he, Viking fans?

Maybe it's just me, but people bringing up AD's first month or so of the season and using those stats as if they somehow make him any less deserving is pretty funny. Considering at that point he was just 8 months away from a severe ACL & MCL tear, I'd say his first 6 weeks of the season were just as impressive as the last half.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Wright

I guarantee that if someone picks Cam Newton in the Top 5 they will regret it.

Maybe it's just me, but people bringing up AD's first month or so of the season and using those stats as if they somehow make him any less deserving is pretty funny..

No it's not just you.
And it is quite funny actually. Because they want to give the award to someone else, they convince themself that it's a legitimate point to dismiss the 2,097 total rushing yards because it wasn't exactly 140 yards every game Sept-Oct-Nov-Dec. They'd prefer it was more balanced.

Maybe it's just me, but people bringing up AD's first month or so of the season and using those stats as if they somehow make him any less deserving is pretty funny. Considering at that point he was just 8 months away from a severe ACL & MCL tear, I'd say his first 6 weeks of the season were just as impressive as the last half.

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-Mike88

No it's not just you.
And it is quite funny actually. Because they want to give the award to someone else, they convince themself that it's a legitimate point to dismiss the 2,097 total rushing yards because it wasn't exactly 140 yards every game Sept-Oct-Nov-Dec. They'd prefer it was more balanced.

First of all JMike that's a ******** point and not even close to the one I was making. Seriously, look over the last few pages of this thread and I have categorically stated I don't see why AD shouldn't get MVP now the Vikings are in the playoffs. Who cares if his numbers were better later in the season because it is irrelevant to the point I was making.

LonghornsLegend, I wasn't trying to take away from Peterson's achievement and I do agree that the fact he achieved what he did after a relatively slow start (by his own standards) is phenomenal. However I don't see how it can be taken into account for MVP. If Peterson does win it then it's because he deserves it, not because he was great and just off an injury.

Here's my point, if people wish to say that Peterson is the most valuable player in the league then that's all I need to hear. But it's the guys who say that the Vikings were horrible and would be the worst team in the league without Peterson tearing **** up. I was simply disagreeing with those types of statement.

Maybe it's just me, but people bringing up AD's first month or so of the season and using those stats as if they somehow make him any less deserving is pretty funny. Considering at that point he was just 8 months away from a severe ACL & MCL tear, I'd say his first 6 weeks of the season were just as impressive as the last half.

The only reason i mentioned his first month was in response to Mannings couple bad games happened to come in the 1st five weeks.. both coming back from severe injuries... but no one pointed out AD also had a rough start to the season as did Manning

Here's my point, if people wish to say that Peterson is the most valuable player in the league then that's all I need to hear. But it's the guys who say that the Vikings were horrible and would be the worst team in the league without Peterson tearing **** up. I was simply disagreeing with those types of statement.

The award is for most valuable player, not most outstanding player. It seems to me that arguing that Peterson's is so valuable to the Vikings they'd be trash without him is a fair argument for the award.

Take away any of them, Peterson, Manning, Rodgers, Brady, I don't think any team wins more than 5 games.

Of course, who knew Cassel could win 11 back a few years ago.

That's why you can't guess and why the award should totally be what they actually did, not what we might think their team would have done without them.

They could still make the play offs now. They got Ryan Mallet at back up . He was a steel of a draft pick for the pats. He should be starting some place else. but people were scared of his off the field issues.

The award is for most valuable player, not most outstanding player. It seems to me that arguing that Peterson's is so valuable to the Vikings they'd be trash without him is a fair argument for the award.

But it's not. They had decent production out of him to start the year and won 4 out of their first 5.

This is all completely speculative at this point. Are people saying that if you swap out Peterson for a decent RB they would be terrible? Because I disagree with that premises because they got decent production from him and won 4 games out of 5. However if they are saying that if you swap out Peterson with a terrible RB then they would be terrible then I agree. However if you swap out Aaron Rodgers with Brady Quinn the Packers are an absolutely terrible team. No running game, bad defense and now with Quinn a bad passing offense.